A method for validating a sensor assembly of a meter is provided. The method comprises a step of receiving one or more sensor calibration values. The method further comprises a step of comparing the received sensor calibration values to one or more known sensor calibration values. The method can then validate the sensor assembly if the one or more received sensor calibration values are within a predetermined tolerance of the one or more known sensor calibration values.
|
15. A method for checking a sensor assembly of a meter, comprising steps of:
receiving with a meter electronics one or more sensor calibration values for the sensor assembly in communication with the meter electronics, wherein the received calibration values are correct calibration values for the sensor assembly;
retrieving one or more known sensor calibration values;
comparing the received sensor calibration values to the one or more known sensor calibration values wherein each known sensor calibration value corresponding to one of at least one valid sensor type; and
determining that the one or more received sensor calibration values fall outside a predetermine tolerance of the one or more known sensor calibration values and, subsequent to the determining, preventing an operation of the meter.
8. A meter electronics (20) for a meter (5) including a sensor assembly (10), the meter electronics (20) including a processing system (203) configured to:
receive one or more sensor calibration values (215, 216) for the sensor assembly (10) in communication with the meter electronics (20), wherein the received calibration values are correct calibration values for the sensor assembly;
compare the received sensor calibration values (215, 216) to one or more known sensor calibration values (213), each known sensor calibration value corresponding to one of at least one valid sensor type;
validate that the sensor assembly (10) is one of the at least one valid sensor type by determining if the one or more received sensor calibration values (215, 216) are within a predetermined tolerance of the one or more known sensor calibration values (213) corresponding to the at least one valid sensor type; and
not permit the meter electronics (20) to operate with the sensor assembly (10) if the sensor assembly (10) is invalid.
1. A method for checking a sensor assembly of a meter by determining whether the sensor assembly is one of at least one valid sensor type, the method comprising steps of:
receiving with a meter electronics one or more sensor calibration values for the sensor assembly in communication with the meter electronics, wherein the received calibration values are correct calibration values for the sensor assembly;
comparing the received sensor calibration values to one or more known sensor calibration values, each known sensor calibration value corresponding to one of the at least one valid sensor type;
either (A) determining that the one or more received sensor calibration values are within a predetermined tolerance of the one or more known sensor calibration values corresponding to one of the at least one valid sensor type, and subsequently validating the sensor assembly; or
(B) determining that the one or more received sensor calibration values are not within a predetermined tolerance of the one or more known sensor calibration values corresponding to one of the at least one valid sensor type, and subsequently preventing the meter electronics of the meter in communication with the sensor assembly from operating with the sensor assembly as the sensor assembly is invalid.
2. The method of
3. The method of
4. The method of
5. The method of
6. The method of
7. The method of
9. The meter electronics (20) of
10. The meter electronics (20) of
11. The meter electronics (20) of
12. The meter electronics (20) of
13. The meter electronics (20) of
14. The meter electronics (20) of
16. The meter electronics (20) of
17. The meter electronics (20) of
18. The meter electronics (20) of
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The present invention relates to, meters, and more particularly, to a method and apparatus for validating a sensor assembly of a meter.
Vibrating meters, such as for example, vibrating densitometers and Coriolis flow meters are generally known and are used to measure mass flow and other information for materials within a conduit. The meter comprises a sensor assembly and an electronics portion. The material within the sensor assembly may be flowing or stationary. Each type of sensor may have unique characteristics, which a meter must account for in order to achieve optimum performance. For example, some sensors may require a flow tube apparatus to vibrate at particular displacement levels. Other sensor assembly types may require special compensation algorithms.
The meter electronics typically include stored sensor calibration values for the particular sensor being used. The meter electronics uses these sensor calibration values in order to accurately measure mass flow rate and density. The sensor calibration values can comprise calibration values derived from measurements under test conditions, such as at the factory. Therefore, each sensor type can have unique calibration values.
Exemplary Coriolis flow meters are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,109,524, 4,491,025, and Re. 31,450 all to J. E. Smith et al. These flow meters have one or more conduits of straight or curved configuration. Each conduit configuration in a Coriolis mass flow meter has a set of natural vibration modes, which may be of simple bending, torsional, or coupled type. Each conduit can be driven to oscillate at a preferred mode.
Material flows into the flow meter sensor assembly from a connected pipeline on the inlet side of the sensor, is directed through the conduit(s), and exits the sensor through the outlet side of the sensor. The natural vibration modes of the vibrating, material filled system are defined in part by the combined mass of the conduits and the material flowing within the conduits.
When there is no flow through the sensor, a driving force applied to the conduit(s) causes all points along the conduit(s) to oscillate with identical phase or a small “zero offset”, which is a time delay measured at zero flow. As material begins to flow through the sensor, Coriolis forces cause each point along the conduit(s) to have a different phase. For example, the phase at the inlet end of the sensor lags the phase at the centralized driver position, while the phase at the outlet leads the phase at the centralized driver position. Pick-off sensors on the conduit(s) produce sinusoidal signals representative of the motion of the conduit(s). Signals output from the pick-off sensors are processed to determine the phase difference between the pick-off sensors. The phase difference between the two or more pick-off sensors is proportional to the mass flow rate of material flowing through the conduit(s).
The mass flow rate of the material can be determined by multiplying the phase difference by a Flow Calibration Factor (FCF). Prior to installation of the sensor assembly of the flow meter into a pipeline, the FCF is determined by a calibration process. In the calibration process, a fluid is passed through the flow tube at a known flow rate and the relationship between the phase difference and the flow rate is calculated (i.e., the FCF). The sensor assembly of the flow meter subsequently determines a flow rate by multiplying the FCF by the phase difference of the pick-off sensors. In addition, other calibration factors can be taken into account in determining the flow rate.
Many vibrating meter applications comprise a vibrating sensor network that may include multiple sensors operating within a communication network of some manner. The network commonly includes a sensor monitoring system that gathers measured flow data and controls and coordinates operations of various sensors. The network may include vibrating sensors of different sizes, models, model years, and electronics and software versions. One problem faced by users of meters is the ability to correctly identify the particular sensor component being used with the meter electronics. Various prior art attempts exist such as manually entering the model/type of the sensor into the meter electronics, having the meter electronics obtain the sensor type data from the sensor in the form of a readable code or identifier stored in a memory included in the sensor, obtaining calibration data for the sensor to identify the type of sensor, etc. These prior art attempts are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,523,639, assigned on its face to Micro Motion, Inc., which is hereby incorporated by reference. However, while these prior art approaches can identify various types of sensors, manufacturers still face competition by “knock-off” sensor assemblies, i.e., unauthorized copies of sensor assemblies, that are used with the manufacturer's meter electronics. Customers may be confused and believe they are using a particular manufacturer's meter, when in fact, they are using only a portion of the manufacturer's meter. For example, a user may be utilizing a meter electronics manufactured and sold by Micro Motion, Inc. while the sensor assembly of the vibrating meter is manufactured by another company. As a result, the vibrating meter will not perform according to Micro Motion's standards. This not only reduces the sales by the manufacturer, but can also weaken the manufacturer's brand name recognition if the knock-off sensor does not meet the manufacturer's quality and accuracy standards.
Prior to the present invention, restricting a customer's use of particular meter electronics with a knock-off sensor was difficult if not impossible so long as the customer was able to input the correct calibration information for the sensor into the meter electronics. Even in prior art approaches where calibration values for the sensor were obtained, the approach did not restrict the use of the meter electronics. For example, the '639 patent mentioned above, discloses a flow meter type identification where calibration values for the sensor assembly of the flow meter are received and correlated to known sensor calibration values. Based on the correlation, the sensor type is identified. The problem with this approach is that the sensor type is simply selected by the calibration values that most closely match the stored values. Therefore, even if the calibration values received by the meter electronics do not match a stored value corresponding to a particular sensor type, the system simply assumes that the sensor comprises the sensor type with the closest calibration values and that the error is due to some anomaly in the manufacturing process or calibration process. Consequently, a knock-off sensor can be used even with the approach disclosed by the '639 patent.
The present invention solves this and other problems and an advance in the art is achieved. The present invention validates a sensor type by comparing one or more received calibration values to known calibration values. If the one or more received calibration values fall outside of a predetermined tolerance, the meter electronics rejects the sensor as comprising an invalid sensor type. For example, the sensor may comprise an invalid sensor type if it is manufactured by a different company.
A method for validating a sensor assembly of a meter is provided according to an embodiment of the invention. The method comprises a step of receiving one or more sensor calibration values. According to an embodiment of the invention, the method further comprises a step of comparing the received sensor calibration values to one or more known sensor calibration values. According to an embodiment of the invention, the method also comprises a step of validating the sensor assembly if the one or more received sensor calibration values are within a predetermined tolerance of the one or more known sensor calibration values.
A meter electronics for a meter is provided according to an embodiment of the invention. The meter includes a sensor assembly. According to an embodiment of the invention, the meter electronics includes a processing system configured to receive one or more sensor calibration values. The processing system is further configured to compare the received sensor calibration values to one or more known sensor calibration values. According to an embodiment of the invention, the processing system is further configured to validate the sensor assembly if the one or more received sensor calibration values are within a predetermined tolerance of a known sensor calibration value of the one or more known sensor calibration values.
According to an aspect of the invention, a method for validating a sensor assembly of a meter comprises steps of:
Preferably, the method further comprises a step of invalidating the sensor assembly if the one or more received sensor calibration values exceed the known sensor calibration values by more than the predetermined tolerance.
Preferably, the method further comprises a step of preventing a meter electronics of the meter in communication with the sensor assembly from operating with the sensor assembly if the sensor assembly is invalid.
Preferably, the method further comprises a step of identifying a sensor type of the sensor assembly based on the comparison of the received sensor calibration values and the known sensor calibration values.
Preferably, the method further comprises a step of storing the identified sensor type along with a sensor identifier.
Preferably, one of the one or more received sensor calibration values comprises a Flow Calibration Factor (FCF).
Preferably, one of the one or more received sensor calibration values comprises a quiescent harmonic frequency (K1) value.
Preferably, the sensor assembly comprises a sensor component of a Coriolis flow meter.
According to another aspect of the invention, a meter electronics for a meter including a sensor assembly includes a processing system is configured to:
Preferably, the processing system is further configured to invalidate the sensor assembly if the one or more received sensor calibration values exceed the known sensor calibration values by more than the predetermined tolerance.
Preferably, the processing system is further configured to prevent the meter electronics from operating with the sensor assembly if the sensor assembly is invalid.
Preferably, the processing system is further configured to identify a sensor type of the sensor assembly based on the comparison of the received sensor calibration values and the known sensor calibration values.
Preferably, the processing system is further configured to store the identified sensor type along with a sensor identifier.
Preferably, one of the one or more received sensor calibration values comprises a Flow Calibration Factor (FCF).
Preferably, one of the one or more received sensor calibration values comprises a quiescent harmonic frequency (K1) value.
Preferably, the sensor assembly comprises a sensor component of a Coriolis flow meter.
In the embodiment shown, the meter electronics 20 is connected to the sensor assembly 10 to measure one or more characteristics of a flowing material, such as, for example, density, mass flow rate, volume flow rate, totalized mass flow, temperature, and other information. While the meter electronics 20 is shown in communication with a single sensor 10, it should be appreciated that the meter electronics 20 may communicate with multiple meter assemblies, including one or more additional meter electronics (not shown). Further, it should be appreciated that while the vibrating meter 5 is described as comprising a Coriolis flow meter, the vibrating meter 5 could just as easily comprise another type of vibrating meter, such as a vibrating densitometer, a vibrating volumetric flow meter, or some other vibrating meter that lacks all of the measurement capabilities of Coriolis flow meters. Therefore, the present invention should not be limited to Coriolis flow meters. Rather, the meter electronics 20 may be in communication with other types of sensor assemblies, with a flowing fluid or a stationary fluid.
The sensor 10 includes a pair of flanges 101 and 101′, manifolds 102 and 102′, and conduits 103A and 103B. Manifolds 102, 102′ are affixed to opposing ends of the conduits 103A and 103B. Flanges 101 and 101′ of the Coriolis flow meter are affixed to opposite ends of the spacer 106. The spacer 106 maintains the spacing between manifolds 102, 102′ to prevent undesired vibrations in the conduits 103A and 103B. The conduits 103A and 103B extend outwardly from the manifolds in an essentially parallel fashion. When the sensor 10 is inserted into a pipeline system (not shown) which carries the flowing material, the material enters sensor 10 through the flange 101, passes through the inlet manifold 102 where the total amount of material is directed to enter conduits 103A, 103B, flows through the conduits 103A, 103B and back into the outlet manifold 102′ where it exits the sensor 10 through the flange 101′.
The sensor 10 can also include a driver 104. The driver 104 is shown affixed to the conduits 103A, 103B in a position where the driver 104 can vibrate the conduits 103A, 103B in the drive mode, for example. The driver 104 may comprise one of many well-known arrangements such as a coil mounted to the conduit 103A and an opposing magnet mounted to the conduit 103B. A drive signal in the form of an alternating current can be provided by the meter electronics 20, such as for example via pathway 110, and passed through the coil to cause both conduits 103A, 103B to oscillate about bending axes W-W and W′-W′.
The sensor 10 includes a pair of pick-off sensors 105, 105′ that are affixed to the conduits 103A, 103B. According to an embodiment of the invention, the pick-offs 105, 105′ may be electromagnetic detectors, for example, pick-off magnets and pick-off coils that produce pick-off signals that represent the velocity and position of the conduits 103A, 103B. For example, the pick-offs 105, 105′ may supply pick-off signals to the meter electronics 20 via pathways 111, 111′. Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the motion of the conduits 103A, 103B is proportional to certain characteristics of the flowing material, for example, the mass flow rate and the density of the material flowing through the conduits 103A, 103B.
According to an embodiment of the invention, the meter electronics 20 receives the pick-off signals from the pick-offs 105, 105′. Path 26 can provide an input and an output means that allows one or more meter electronics 20 to interface with an operator. The meter electronics 20 can measure one or more characteristics of the fluid under test such as, for example, a phase difference, a frequency, a time delay, a density, a mass flow rate, a volume flow rate, a totalized mass flow, a temperature, a meter verification, and other information.
The interface 201 can receive the sensor signals 210 from the driver 104 or the pick-off sensors 205, 205′, via leads 210, 211, 211′. The interface 201 may perform any necessary or desired signal conditioning, such as any manner of formatting, amplification, buffering, etc. Alternatively, some or all of the signal conditioning can be performed in the processing system 203. In addition, the interface 201 can enable communications between the meter electronics 20 and external devices. The interface 201 can be capable of any manner of electronic, optical, or wireless communication.
The interface 201 in one embodiment can include a digitizer (not shown), wherein the sensor signals 210 comprise analog sensor signals. The digitizer can sample and digitize the analog sensor signals and produce digital sensor signals. The digitizer can also perform any needed decimation, wherein the digital sensor signal is decimated in order to reduce the amount of signal processing needed and to reduce the processing time.
The processing system 203 can conduct operations of the meter electronics 20 and process flow measurements from the sensor 10. The processing system 203 can execute the data processing required to implement one or more processing routines, such as a sensor validation routine 212, as well as process the flow measurements in order to produce one or more flow characteristics.
The processing system 203 can comprise a general-purpose computer, a micro-processing system, a logic circuit, or some other general purpose or customized processing device. The processing system 203 can be distributed among multiple processing devices. The processing system 203 can include any manner of integral or independent electronic storage medium, such as the storage system 204.
It should be understood that the meter electronics 20 may include various other components and functions that are generally known in the art. These additional features are omitted from the description and the figures for the purpose of brevity. Therefore, the present invention should not be limited to the specific embodiments shown and discussed.
As discussed above, according to an embodiment of the invention, the meter electronics 20 can implement a sensor validation routine 212 in order to validate a sensor assembly. The sensor validation routine 212 can validate a sensor type of one or more sensors in communication with the meter electronics 20. While
Each sensor, such as the sensor 10 in communication with the meter electronics 20 has various calibration values. For example, if the sensor 10 comprises a Coriolis flow meter, the calibration values may comprise a FCF and a quiescent harmonic frequency (K1) value. The FCF represents the flow tube geometry of the specific sensor apparatus. The FCF can account for variations in the flow tube dimensions during manufacturing and can also account for variations in vibrational response due to variations in properties of the flow tube material. The K1 value represents a quiescent harmonic frequency of the sensor as measured with air in the flow tube(s) and at a calibration temperature of 0° Centigrade. The K1 value typically is in units of frequency or in units of time (i.e., a wave period). Other sensor calibration values (not shown) can comprise, but are not limited to, a K value (same as K1 but for water in the sensor), a K3 value for flow effect of density, a temperature calibration value, etc. Other sensor calibration values are contemplated and are included within the scope of the present invention.
As shown in
In one embodiment, the known sensor calibration values 213 are stored in a correlation table 213. The correlation table 213 can include multiple sensor type records. A sensor type record of the correlation table 213 includes a set of known sensor calibration values and a corresponding sensor type for the set of known sensor calibration values. Therefore, for an input of a particular set of sensor calibration values, the correlation table 213 outputs a unique sensor type matching the particular set of sensor calibration values, to within a predetermined tolerance. If the input sensor calibration values fall outside of a predetermined tolerance of any of the stored sensor calibration values, the meter electronics 20 determines that the input values correspond to an invalid sensor and, in some embodiments, does not permit operation of the meter electronics 20 with the invalid sensor.
The sensor type is dictated by factors including, but not limited to, the manufacturer, the accuracy rating of the sensor, the pressure rating, the temperature rating, the material or materials used in forming the sensor, and the line size of the tubing forming the sensor. Each of these sensor characteristics can affect or control the sensor calibration values used in the determination of the sensor type. For example, a single manufacturer may be able to reproduce thousands of sensors of a specific sensor type with each of the individual sensors having a FCF to within 0.05% of one another and a K1 value to within 0.75% of one another. Conversely, other manufacturers that attempt to reproduce the sensor type may have FCF and K1 values well outside these tolerances. It should be appreciated, that the above-mentioned values are merely examples and the values may exceed these tolerances for other manufacturers as well as other sensor types made by the same manufacturer.
According to an embodiment of the invention, the meter electronics can utilize the reproduction capabilities of a particular manufacturer in order to exclude sensors as invalid with calibration values that exceed a predetermined tolerance from stored calibration values, and presumably are made from a different manufacturer. If a sensor has calibration values that exceed the tolerance of the stored calibration values, but the user or operator simply inputs different values in order to fall within the predetermined tolerance and thus validate the sensor, the meter electronics 20 may accept the sensor as an acceptable sensor type, but any measurements generated will be inaccurate because the wrong calibration values are being used to measure the one or more fluid characteristics.
According to an embodiment of the invention, the meter electronics 20 can remotely read the calibration values, such as obtaining the sensor calibration values from additional sensors (not shown) via communication line 26, for example. Alternatively, the sensor calibration values can be entered into the meter electronics 20 by a user through the user interface 201. As another alternative, the sensor calibration values may be obtained from additional sensors wirelessly through the interface 201 or through other remote devices through the communication interface 201. According to another embodiment of the invention, the sensor may include a memory device (not shown) that can store the sensor calibration values. The meter electronics 20 may then receive the sensor calibration values once the meter electronics 20 is in communication with the sensor and thus, the memory device, such as disclosed in the above-mentioned '639 patent.
The sensor calibration values are used in operation by the meter electronics to calibrate one or more fluid characteristics. The sensor calibration values are typically obtained by measurement at the factory, under test conditions. The sensor calibration values are commonly stored in the meter electronics before the sensor is shipped from the factory. However, the sensor calibration values can be programmed or re-programmed into the meter electronics by a user in the field. Advantageously, if the meter electronics 20 is reconfigured, the values can be re-programmed so that the particular sensor assembly can still be confirmed as a valid sensor type. This programming is typically facilitated by a tag attached to the sensor, with the tag being stamped, embossed, or printed with the factory-measured sensor calibration values. Therefore, the user can re-program the meter electronics with correct calibration information if required, such as in the event of power loss, memory loss, re-configuration, replacement of the sensor, etc.
The sensor validation routine 212 starts in step 401 where one or more sensor calibration values can be received by the meter electronics 20 for a sensor assembly to be validated, such as the sensor 10. The sensor calibration values may be determined from a calibration routine, for example, which are generally known in the art. As previously discussed, the sensor calibration values can comprise the FCF and the K1 values. The sensor calibration values can be concurrently or previously received from a user through a user interface, or can be concurrently or previously received from a remote terminal, for example. While the chart shown in
In step 402, the received sensor calibration values are compared to known sensor calibration values 213 that are substantially representative of various sensor types that are accepted as comprising valid sensor types. The known sensor calibration values may be retrieved from a graph, look-up table, etc. If the received sensor calibration values exceed the closest known sensor calibration value by more than the predetermined tolerance, the process proceeds to step 403 where the sensor to be validated fails the validation. Conversely, if the received sensor calibration values are within the predetermined tolerance, the process proceeds to step 404 where the sensor to be validated passes the validation and the meter electronics 20 can operate with the sensor.
The process may further include an optional step 405 where the validated sensor type is stored. The sensor type may be stored in a data structure of some manner, along with a sensor identifier of the subject sensor 10. The sensor identifier can be any manner of network address, sensor number, sensor serial number, assigned sensor number, etc., that is used to identify the subject sensor 10.
The sensor validation system and method according to the present invention differs from the prior art in that the sensor calibration values are used not only to identify the sensor type, but to validate the sensor type as an acceptable sensor to be used with the meter electronics. Prior art approaches did not restrict use of the meter electronics to only valid sensor. Rather, the meter electronics simply sought a “best fit” for the sensor in communication with the meter electronics. The prior art did not prevent knock-off sensor assembly from being used with the meter electronics 20.
The sensor validation according to the present invention can be implemented according to any of the embodiments in order to obtain several advantages, if desired. The sensor validation provides a low cost sensor validation. No extra hardware is needed in a sensor and the invention can be implemented through additional software routines. The sensor validation provides accurate and reliable sensor validation, without the introduction of additional reliability issues. According to an embodiment of the invention, the sensor validation provides a sensor validation that does not require any additional actions or operations on the part of a user or system operator. The sensor validation provides a sensor validation that uses information inherent within a sensor or a network of sensors.
The detailed descriptions of the above embodiments are not exhaustive descriptions of all embodiments contemplated by the inventors to be within the scope of the invention. Indeed, persons skilled in the art will recognize that certain elements of the above-described embodiments may variously be combined or eliminated to create further embodiments, and such further embodiments fall within the scope and teachings of the invention. It will also be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that the above-described embodiments may be combined in whole or in part to create additional embodiments within the scope and teachings of the invention.
Thus, although specific embodiments of, and examples for, the invention are described herein for illustrative purposes, various equivalent modifications are possible within the scope of the invention, as those skilled in the relevant art will recognize. The teachings provided herein can be applied to other meters, and not just to the embodiments described above and shown in the accompanying figures. Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be determined from the following claims.
McAnally, Craig B, Hays, Paul J
| Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
| Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
| 2958218, | |||
| 5207088, | Apr 11 1991 | Dresser Industries, Inc.; DRESSER INDUSTRIES, INC , A CORPORATION OF DELAWARE | Expansion chamber method and apparatus for eliminating accuracy errors when testing gaseous flowmeters |
| 5347476, | Nov 25 1992 | Instrumentation system with multiple sensor modules | |
| 5907104, | Dec 08 1995 | FMC TECHNOLOGIES INC | Signal processing and field proving methods and circuits for a coriolis mass flow meter |
| 5983700, | Apr 25 1997 | Ricoh Company, LTD | Calibration method of a flow sensor output |
| 6170338, | Mar 27 1997 | Micro Motion, Inc | Vortex flowmeter with signal processing |
| 6292810, | Mar 03 1997 | Polymorphic enhanced modeling | |
| 6327914, | Sep 30 1998 | Micro Motion, Inc. | Correction of coriolis flowmeter measurements due to multiphase flows |
| 6539313, | Sep 22 1999 | Deckel Maho Pfronten GmbH | Monitoring procedure and a monitoring installation for numerically controlled machine tools |
| 7505861, | Jul 08 2002 | ABB Patent GmbH | Method for monitoring the installation of a measurement device |
| 7523639, | Dec 10 2003 | Micro Motion, Inc. | Flow meter type identification |
| 20020133307, | |||
| 20030233860, | |||
| 20070028663, | |||
| 20070113678, | |||
| 20070193334, | |||
| 20080027660, | |||
| 20090222231, | |||
| JP2007521470, | |||
| JP2009031153, | |||
| WO2005062003, | |||
| WO2009059975, |
| Executed on | Assignor | Assignee | Conveyance | Frame | Reel | Doc |
| Aug 24 2010 | HAYS, PAUL J | Micro Motion, Inc | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 029763 | /0556 | |
| Aug 24 2010 | MCANALLY, CRAIG B | Micro Motion, Inc | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 029763 | /0556 | |
| Aug 27 2010 | Micron Motion, Inc. | (assignment on the face of the patent) | / |
| Date | Maintenance Fee Events |
| Aug 23 2023 | M1551: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 4th Year, Large Entity. |
| Date | Maintenance Schedule |
| Mar 24 2023 | 4 years fee payment window open |
| Sep 24 2023 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
| Mar 24 2024 | patent expiry (for year 4) |
| Mar 24 2026 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 4) |
| Mar 24 2027 | 8 years fee payment window open |
| Sep 24 2027 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
| Mar 24 2028 | patent expiry (for year 8) |
| Mar 24 2030 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 8) |
| Mar 24 2031 | 12 years fee payment window open |
| Sep 24 2031 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
| Mar 24 2032 | patent expiry (for year 12) |
| Mar 24 2034 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 12) |